The Rwanda Genocide, sparked by the death of the interim Hutu President Habyarimana on April 9, 1994, it was the fastest, most vicious human massacre in the twentieth century. It was carried out with no significant intervention or aid force from any international communities. Many administrations claim they had no knowledge that a genocide was in the making, thus they were unable to intervene due to the lack of warning signs and information. This is not true. My thesis will focus on how the international community utterly failed to prevent nor help this atrocity. The international inaction resulted in nearly a million people slaughtered without any regard from the western world, I will also be evaluating how this plays a role in liberalism …show more content…
It seems to be a world of greed, self-interest and absolutely no regard for morality. Having the UNSC have known a genocide was on its way, the United Nations Security council, could have stopped this disaster. The true facts about this inaction is that, the UNSC did not intervene because of economic disinterest, and lack of empathy for African lives. In Linda Melvern’s reading, it states: “Boutros-Ghali told Toppel that a modest reinforcement of 5000 troops could have prevented the slaughter….only a week earlier, the UNSC decided to withdraw soldiers from UNAMIR.“ How can one justifiably, come to reasoning with this decision? There were practically trial massacres happening throughout Rwanda. “Hutus slaughtered 300 Tutsi civilians in Kabirira in 1990. In January 1991, 500-1000 Tutsi were murdered in Kinigi. In March 1992, 300 Tutsi were massacred by Hutu Militias in Begesera” (Stanton, 2009) Tutsi were being systematically killed. Why were the international communities shunning them out? Surely they must have had a good reason? No. Any rational person will believe The United Nations Security council did not intervene because of lack of will, or effort. They had plenty of evidence leading up to the genocide to prevent, or even control the genocide from occurring. One important reason I believe this is, Canadian Lt. Gen, Romeo Dallaire sent a cable …show more content…
The RP2 is based on promoting interconnectedness between nations that can no longer perform what actions that state desires, which in a way it destroys the idea of “state sovereignty” which will be the basis for change if executed right. The Responsibility to Protect purposes to reframe “the idea that sovereign states have a responsibility to protect their own citizens from avoidable catastrophe – from mass murder and rape, from starvation – but that when they are unwilling or unable to do so, that responsibility must be borne by the broader community of states” (Responsibility to protect, 2001) Allowing sovereign states to collectively intervene without another states approval simplifies interventions, because there is no need for approval or debate amongst the security council. RP2 is a broader liberalist vision of human protection and assigned responsibilities. It also reframes the notion of state sovereignty because instead of international communities sitting idly aside while genocides and civil wars occur, they are forced to act if the state is unable or unwilling to fulfil the basic fundamental rights of their citizens. Although I believe that the responsibility to protect doctrine was made to
Genocide is a pressing issue with a multitude of questions and debates surrounding it. It is the opinion of many people that the United Nations should not get involved with or try to stop ongoing genocide because of costs or impositions on the rights of a country, but what about the rights of an individual? The UN should get involved in human rights crimes that may lead to genocide to prevent millions of deaths, save money on humanitarian aid and clean up, and fulfill their responsibilities to stop such crimes. It is preferable to stop genocide before it occurs through diplomacy, but if necessary, military force may be used as a last resort. Navi Pillay, Human Rights High Commissioner, stated, “Concerted efforts by the international community at critical moments in time could prevent the escalation of violence into genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing.”
Since Burundi’s independence in 1962, there have been two instances of genocide: the 1972 mass killings of Hutus by the Tutsi-dominated government, and the 1993 mass killings of the Tutsis by the Hutu populace. Both of these events in Burundi received different levels of attention by the international community and the western media due to a lack of foreign governmental interest, political distraction, and an unwillingness to acknowledge the severity of these atrocities in Burundi. Interestingly, events of genocide occurring at times without these distractions received more foreign attention than those ignored due to these factors. Because of this, much of the western world is unaware of the Burundian genocide and events similar to it.
It is impossible to even imagine the scale of hate, destruction, and massacre that occurred in Rwanda during those 100 days. Linda Melvern, on the International Development Research Centere website, describes in an article the Gikondo Massacre, one of the bloodiest mass-killings during the genocide. On the third day of the turmoil, about 500 Tutsi, many of them children, gathered at a church in the middle of Kigali, having stepped over the bodies of their neighbors to get there. They pleaded the clergy for protection. The priest did his best, but presidential guard soldiers arrived and accused the church of harboring evil. He then left, telling soldiers not to waste bullets; the Interahamwe, he said, would arrive with...
- Specifically state to the reader if there was U.N. intervention, could genocide have been avoided?
Rwanda was a German colony but then was given to Belgium “who favored the minority Tutsis over the Hutus, exacerbated[exacerbating] the tendency of the few to oppress the many”(History.com). This created a feeling of anger towards the Tutsis, because they had much more power than Hutus. The RPF decided to create a government consisting of a Hutu and a Tutsi holding the highest government positions. As the RPF took control of the government, “some two million Hutus – both civilians and some of those involved in the genocide – then fled across the border into DR Congo.
Africa has been an interesting location of conflicts. From the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea to the revolutionary conflict in Libya and Egypt, one of the greatest conflicts is the Rwandan Genocide. The Rwandan Genocide included two tribes in Rwanda: Tutsis and Hutus. Upon revenge, the Hutus massacred many Tutsis and other Hutus that supported the Tutsis. This gruesome war lasted for a 100 days. Up to this date, there have been many devastating effects on Rwanda and the global community. In addition, many people have not had many acknowledgements for the genocide but from this genocide many lessons have been learned around the world.
Percival, Valerie, and Thomas Homer-Dixon. "Getting Rwanda wrong. (genocide in Rwanda)." Saturday Night. v110. n7 (Sept 1995): p47(3). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. K12 Trial Site. 12 Apr. 2010 .
As the news reported that Islamic State committed genocide against Christians and other minorities had suffered serious defeats from recent battles against the allied forces, the images of piles of dead bodies shown to the world in Rwanda about a couple decades ago emerge once again and triggers an interesting puzzle: why did the Rwandan Genocide happen in one of the smallest nations in the African Continent? The documentary film, Rwanda-Do Scars Ever Fade?, upon which this film analysis is based provides an answer to the puzzle.
"Rwanda, Genocide, Hutu, Tutsi, Mass Execution, Ethnic Cleansing, Massacre, Human Rights, Victim Remembrance, Education, Africa." UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2013.
In 1994 in Rwanda, a million members of the Tutsi tribe were killed by members of the Hutu tribe in a massacre that took place while the world looked away. "Hotel Rwanda" is not the story of that massacre. It is the story of a hotel manager who saved the lives of 1,200 people by being, essentially, a very good hotel managerIn 1994 in Rwanda, a million members of the Tutsi tribe were killed by members of the Hutu tribe in a massacre that took place while the world looked away. "Hotel Rwanda" is not the story of that massacre. It is the story of a hotel manager who saved the lives of 1,200 people by being, essentially, a very good hotel managerIn 1994 in Rwanda, a million members of the Tutsi tribe were killed by members of the Hutu tribe in a massacre that took pla...
Various schools of thought exist as to why genocide continues at this deplorable rate and what must be done in order to uphold our promise. There are those who believe it is inaction by the international community which allows for massacres and tragedies to occur - equating apathy or neutrality with complicity to evil. Although other nations may play a part in the solution to genocide, the absolute reliance on others is part of the problem. No one nation or group of nations can be given such a respo...
The main reason the Hutus killed Tutsis in the Rwandan genocide was for economic reasons. The Tutsis began to benefit greatly from killing Tutsis by looting them and gaining things like money, land, and cattle. The looting of Tutsis became a means of income to the Hutus. The Hutus neglected their fields in favor of killing so they could loot for better food and goods. As Jean Baptiste states, “Why dig in the dirt when we were harvesting without working, eating our fill without growing a thing?”(Hatzfeld, 60) The Hutus mind set of being farmers shifts to being killers who can benefit more from that, than from their regular jobs of harvesting. As stated by Adalbert, “…we didn’t care about what we accomplished in the marshes, only about what was important to us for comfort.” (Hatzfeld, 83) This shows how the men became more concerned with looting and profiting from the killing than actually being concerned with killing people. So in a sense, the job of killing became a means for the men to do their more comfortable job of looting. One can begin to enter the Hutu mind set and see how, by killing other people, people they may have a...
In the years after the genocide, we as people had questioned our past decisions and our countries decision to stay out of the genocide until it was too late. I too have question my countries decision. Why didn’t the US interfere with the genocide and be the hero my favorite historical anime, Hetalia, made it out to be? I believe not helping the innocent people being murdered in Rwanda was wrong of all the countries of the world but now it is too late to change the past and we can only look to the future. We can look to the future and hope and pray that another genocide never occurs but it’s useless. As long as there are people, there will be hate and as long as there is hate there will be murder.
Some of the problems include how the Tutsi people were treated and also how the Hutu people. Genocide is a big problem in Rwanda. In 1994 many people were murdered. From April to July of 1994, members of the Hutu ethnic majority in the east central African nation of Rwanda murdered as many as 800,000 people, mostly of the Tutsi minority. About 85% of the population was Hutu, the rest were Tutsi along with a small number of Twa.
Baldauf, S. (2009). Why the US didn't intervene in the Rwandan genocide. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2009/0407/p06s14-woaf.html [Accessed: 21 Feb 2014].